Posted on 09/11/2006 8:46:31 AM PDT by conservativecorner
House Majority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) last week would not rule out passing a comprehensive immigration bill before Congress recesses for the mid-term elections.
When a reporter asked him if it was realistic to assume Congress would not pass such a bill in the limited time left on the legislative calendar, he replied, “That is not fair.”
Boehner said that “conversations about the overall bill, the larger bill, are going to continue,” but suggested alternative methods to secure the border were being planned.
“You will see us, I think, again this month, move to include additional money for fencing on the border, more money for agents on the border and more money for surveillance on the border,” he said.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (Tenn.) echoed Boehner’s remarks. Frist said, “Through the Defense appropriation bill and the Homeland Security appropriation bill, we will put heavy resources on making our borders secure. We need to aggressively, through legislation and through appropriations, secure our borders,”
Over the August recess, the Congressional Budget Office quietly released a report that estimated the total cost to taxpayers of the immigration bill that passed the Senate would be $127 billion over the next decade.
When I asked if that was an acceptable cost, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said, “One of the alternative proposals of our colleagues on the Republican side is to put 11 million people in jail.Who wants to pay for that? What does that get? I don’t know specifically how they allocated the costs or their priorities of the bill that may or may not be judged as a good investment, but let me say that the alternative is far more costly.”
Enforcement Alone
Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R.-Ariz.) said passing a bill could be possible if it focused on enforcement alone. “No if, ands or buts” he said, “and certainly no add-ons from the comprehensive camp.”
Rep. Steve King (R.-Iowa) said he would welcome appropriations funding for border security but that he’d rather see stand-alone legislation. “Mr. Pence is not going to get his Ellis Island kiosks this year,” he said, referring to the immigration plan being pushed by Rep. Mike Pence (R.-Ind.) that mandates immigrants visit foreign “Ellis Island Centers” to apply for citizenship.“So why don’t we do what we all agree needs to be done and let’s be done,” said King.“That is to shut off the four million people a year pouring across our Southern border and then take up the debate in January.”
If by November 8 the Southern border is not secured, King advised voters to “look at the voting records of the candidates on the ballot. If they support House enforcement then stand with them because they are for controlling our borders. If they voted against it, brand them with the scarlet letter ‘A’ for amnesty and vote accordingly.”
I read you post.
Explain how this...
I guess that means we need to vote out the GOP senators that want amnesty?
Segues to this...
Right. Since it is actually the Senate, not the house that wants amnesty.
I'm sure you have a coherant point in there somewhere, but I can't find it. It sounds like you are stating we should protect even amnesty Republicans because the House as a whole is for enforcement, and focus solely on the Senate. That is, if you aren't simply throwing out two separate disjointed statements.
If the first is what you intended, forget it. I'm not supporting an amnesty Congressman because the Majority of the House has its head on straight. Instead I'll work to get border conservatives challengers elected elsewhere where I can.
If you are making separate points, fine, I'll address them separately.
If your Senator supports amnesty, you are looking at someone that does not care whether they win or lose. Absolutely.
Second point, yes, the House is protecting us from amnesty not the Senate. What's your point?
Instead of alienating many freepers with lectures, you should be encouraging the President and Confress to pass a ENFORCEMENT FIRST bill in both the house and senate. Then the GOP would not have to be concerned at possible poor conservative turn out.
If fear of the democrats is the only arguement you have, it won't fire up a portion of the base that has just about had enough.
You fire that portion of the base up by passing an ENFORCEMENT FIRST BILL,
Then you start cutting out of control spending etc. etc.
My point is it is the GOP MAJORITY SENATE that wants amnesty.
Vote the senators that want amnesty OUT! Regardless of who will control the next senate.
Well I guess we shall see how the GOP grassroots reacts on election day, with Open Borders Policies, Out of control Spending Policies, Failure to Punish Clintonista's (Like Sandy Burger) etc.
Time will tell if the path the President, the GOP congress and and the GOP Senate has taken on issues dear to many conservations will be what the majority wants.
If I don't vote, don't lose any s;eep over it. There will be a felon of illegal to take the place of my vote.
The second you put limits on donors and donations you end up with nothing but the big money boys running everything.
Remember, they hire folks who figure out how to get around the law. A poor man doesn't have such resources.
Pouting? Holding our breath?
Do you really think that insulting people is the way to persuade them to do what you want? I'd call your tactics of putting people down because we disagree with you juvenile behavior. The pot and kettle thing.
They can also purchase the compliance of Senators and Congresscritters in writing the law so they are exempted from the controls and only the little guy who's involved in a political party gets crushed.
They can also purchase the compliance of Senators and Congresscritters in writing the law so they are exempted from the controls and only the little guy who's involved in a political party gets crushed.
Would it be safe for me to assume you feel this isn't happening now?
Ye gods. Will these people never learn?
Here I am posting a very "pretend" post filled with cynicism, and you ask such strange questions. Didn't you catch that phrase I concocted to name my new invention?
Sorry, you lost me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.